It's one thing to say "I liked 360 set list better than the ZOOTV one", even if you hadn't attended ZOOTV. You can read the set list without having seen either show and make that call. But to come on here and say that the 360 show was "better" or "superior" without actually having been at ZOOTV, is of course ridiculous. Again, it's your opinion, but as I've established in example after example after example, second hand knowledge is no substitute for the real thing.

OK, what if I have seen every tour since TJT except ZooTV, can ZooTV still be my favorite by your logic?

It's one thing to say "I liked 360 set list better than the ZOOTV one", even if you hadn't attended ZOOTV. You can read the set list without having seen either show and make that call. But to come on here and say that the 360 show was "better" or "superior" without actually having been at ZOOTV, is of course ridiculous. Again, it's your opinion, but as I've established in example after example after example, second hand knowledge is no substitute for the real thing.

OK, what if I have seen every tour since TJT except ZooTV, can ZooTV still be my favorite by your logic?

Well sure...any tour can be your "favorite", whether you've seen it or not. I wouldn't question that, and that's not at issue.

But to come on here and say that the 360 show was "better" or "superior" without actually having been at ZOOTV, is of course ridiculous.

But I think that ZooTV is not just my favorite, but is superior, to all other U2 tours. Why is that ridiculous?

Are you saying it's OK to prefer a tour you haven't seen, but not OK to dismiss one?

I think it's OK to prefer whichever one you want for whatever reason you want. As I said, there are no "wrong" opinions, just opinions that are more informed than others. Actually attending a concert is a big piece of information.

It's quite another call show "inferior" or "superior" to one or more others that you haven't seen. As I said, and pointed out with numerous examples, reading about a thing, looking at pictures, and even seeing a video is different than actually experiencing a thing for yourself. Don't you allow that an opinion can be influenced by, even changed, when experiencing something yourself? People who read the bible can still have an epiphany when they go to church. Someone who knows all a politicians positions can change their opinion on that person when they see them speak in person. Look at the examples I gave to the Professor.

I'll give you two real examples from my own life.

I travel quite a bit, and my girlfriend wanted to go on a cruise. I'd never been on a cruise, but I was sure I'd hate it. I did all the research...read the brochure, watched the promotional videos, read reviews, talked to people who went on this cruise, and investigated it as much as I possibly could without actually going. And I was convinced I'd hate it. I knew all the reasons I'd despise a cruise, and nothing on that boat was going to change it. Well, guess what, my girlfriend prevailed (of course), we went on the cruise, and I loved it. The things I'd thought I'd hate, I didn't, and the experience changed my opinion of cruses. At least that one.

You don't allow that an opinion can be changed like that, by actually experiencing something for yourself?

I'll give you another example, right on point. I saw the ZOO TV show and I loved it. I was blown away. Year and years later, I watched the Sydney DVD and Bono in that gold Machpisto outfit and I thought...."What the f*** is this? Did he do this at my show"? I honestly don't remember it. I know when I saw it on the DVD I really didn't care for it (we agree on this point OAP). What I do know is that if I based my opinion of ZOOTV solely on the DVD, without actually being there, I might have felt the same way OAP feels about it.

Don't you allow that had OAP actually been at the concert his opinion might be different? I'd submit that, statistically at least, it probably would, since I think we can all agree that most people who've been to both shows prefer ZOOTV. Now, maybe OAP still might feel the same having seen both...but we just don't know, since he didn't.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and none of them are really wrong. But as I said, some are more informed than others, and those are the ones that I give the most credence to.

« Last Edit: July 30, 2011, 12:48:23 PM by Gavin Tuesday »

Logged

The Professor

Gavin, as Exile pointed out, you're all over the place with your logic and arguments here. Perhaps you could rephrase in a nutshell the point you are trying to make. You seem to have glossed over what I wrote earlier about being able to form an educated opinion through experience AND through research. IF, though, the thread was set up to ask which show you saw live and in person was the best, then the parameters of the discussion would be clear. Since there were no parameters given, the thread is wide open for anyone to draw their conclusions and present their opinions based on either pure experience of the tours, a mix of experience and secondhand knowledge/research, or purely based on secondhand knowledge/research.

You're totally missing my point, Gav. I am not saying that a person's bad opinion could not conceivably be changed if he actually were to experience the thing he thinks he doesn't like. I am asking whether a person can think a tour he hasn't seen is superior to the ones he has.

And if so, then what does that say about the role of personal experience?

Gavin, as Exile pointed out, you're all over the place with your logic and arguments here. Perhaps you could rephrase in a nutshell the point you are trying to make. You seem to have glossed over what I wrote earlier about being able to form an educated opinion through experience AND through research. IF, though, the thread was set up to ask which show you saw live and in person was the best, then the parameters of the discussion would be clear. Since there were no parameters given, the thread is wide open for anyone to draw their conclusions and present their opinions based on either pure experience of the tours, a mix of experience and secondhand knowledge/research, or purely based on secondhand knowledge/research.

You're right, Exile, this guy's trouble!

Nope. Every one of my arguments is spot on.

But, for your benefit, my argument, in a nutshell, is that some opinions are more valid than others, and those that are based on fact, education and experience will tend to be the most valid. Simply reading about something, or watching a video, or researching it, is an experience of a kind, but it's not as substitute for experiencing it first hand. And, after all the research in the world, your opinion can be changed, or at least become more valid, with first hand experience.

Which part of that do you disagree with, specifically?

If you can find a single area where I've contradicted myself in this thread, I'd love to hear it. And please, provide the exact contradictions, with my actual words.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and none of them are really wrong. But as I said, some are more informed than others, and those are the ones that I give the most credence to."

A polite but rather passive-aggressive way of saying "you're entitled to your opinion, but you're wrong."

Not at all. Those are your words, not mine. There are no "wrong" opinions. As I said, some are just more informed than others. Had OAP actually seen both shows, I'd never would have questioned what he said, because his experience would have been the same as mine.

Really, Professor..is this that complicated?

Logged

The Professor

I WILL admit that seeing the 360 Tour live changed my perceptions of it that had been formed from reading too much about it online, in the @U2 forums, and watching too many YouTube clips. The magnitude and beauty of it all was not conveyed properly in those tiny clips, though it WAS mentioned numerous times in articles, reviews, and forum threads.

But I didn't leave the show thinking, "that was better than ZOO TV." The EXPERIENCE of it did not change my thinking in that regard, it only confirmed what had been written about the 360 Tour, actually.

If I HADN'T seen the 360 Tour I'd still have the same opinion about which one measured up best (ZOO TV) and am confident that the conclusions drawn from my research and reading would have been the same either way...because even having seen the show, they are exactly the same.